Abstract
This research aims to examine and analyze Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr's views on modernity and the Islamic world's response to the Western civilization. The main issue of the study is evaluating the effectiveness of Nasr's ideas in offering a coherent and defensive project against modernity. The central question is whether Nasr has provided a practical and achievable model for Islamic civilization-building. The research method is analytical and critical, based on Nasr’s written works, intellectual positions, and cultural practices, grounded in Perennialism and Islamic mysticism, especially his concept of the "Perennial Wisdom." The results indicate that although Nasr, through profound criticism of Western modernity, advocates a return to Islamic tradition and spirituality, his understanding of religion's role in the public sphere is incomplete and impractical. An excessive focus on Sufism, coupled with neglecting the Sharia, has led to the marginalization of the social aspects of religion and a lack of political solutions. Despite his criticism of modernity, Nasr does not have a clear view on Islamic governance, and his experience with the Pahlavi regime exacerbates this ambiguity. Ultimately, the research hypothesis, based on the ineffectiveness of Nasr’s theory as a comprehensive model for a civilizational confrontation with modernity, is confirmed.
Keywords: Seyyed Hussein Nasr, tradition, modernity, Islam, spirituality and politics.
 

Introduction
This research aims to examine and analyze the perspectives of Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr regarding modernity and the encounter of the Islamic world with the new Western civilization.
The main issue under investigation is assessing the effectiveness of Nasr's ideas in presenting a defensive and coherent project in response to modernity. The central question is whether Nasr has been able to offer a practical and feasible model for Islamic civilizational development.
Materials & Methods
The research method is analytical-critical, based on a study of Nasr’s written works, intellectual positions, and cultural engagements, grounded in Traditionalism (Perennialism) and Islamic mysticism—especially his interpretation of the "Perennial Philosophy."
Discussion & Result
The findings suggest that while Nasr, through his deep critique of Western modernity, calls for a return to Islamic tradition and spirituality, his conception of religion in the public sphere is incomplete and impractical. His excessive emphasis on tariqa (the spiritual path) and neglect of shari‘a (Islamic law) leads to the marginalization of the social rulings of religion and a weakness in offering political solutions. Despite his critiques of modernity, Nasr does not offer a clear vision for religious governance, and his collaboration with the Pahlavi regime further amplifies this ambiguity. Ultimately, the hypothesis of this research—that Nasr's theory is ineffective as a comprehensive model for civilizational confrontation with modernity—is confirmed.
Accordingly, this research is structured into the following main sections:
- The life and intellectual genealogy of Nasr
- Tradition and Traditionalism
- Modernity and its roots
- Islam and modernity
The confrontation between the modern Western civilization and the Islamic world
Based on an examination of Nasr's intellectual position and his understanding of modern Western civilization and the Islamic world’s engagement with it, the overall finding supports the hypothesis that he fails to offer an effective defensive project against modernity.
Conclusion
This conclusion is reinforced by the following key points:
By dividing Islam into shari‘a and tariqa, and emphasizing the latter, Nasr effectively confines the project of religious civilization-building to aesthetic, mystical, and abstract domains. He criticizes revolutionary revivalist movements like the Islamic Revolution for their focus on jurisprudence while neglecting literary, philosophical, and artistic elements. However, Nasr must address the contradiction inherent in disregarding fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), which is the practical and visible aspect of religion: Is it possible to build an Islamic civilization and confront the West while ignoring fiqh? Can a neglect of religious social rulings and their marginalization prepare the ground for the expansion of Islam and a religious civilization.
This crucial point must be emphasized: the marginalization of fiqh in the Islamic world has allowed secularism to dominate—whether under the banner of mysticism, philosophy, or other forms. The success of a great reformer like Imam Khomeini lay in his intelligent integration of fiqh, philosophy, and mysticism as the civilizational triangle and the foundation for the public presence of Islam, with fiqh at the center. Even prominent figures of the modern Mu‘tazila in the Arab world, such as Mohammed Abed al-Jabri, acknowledge this.
It seems this same view explains Nasr’s involvement in the Pahlavi government and his close cooperation with a regime that openly mocked Islamic traditions—serving as head of Queen Farah Pahlavi’s office.
While Nasr theoretically defends the connection between religion and politics, his interpretation differs from current frameworks. He considers the mere presence of a monarch who claims religiosity to be sufficient for religious governance. In his view, if people consider the monarch to be the “shadow of God” and the monarch accepts this role, the government is thus religious.
This outlook can be justified by his intellectual affiliation with Traditionalism and Sufism. At the height of Iran’s 1979 revolution, he proposed an “Islamic monarchy” in which religious scholars could advise on state affairs, but the state structure would remain unchanged.
With full respect for Dr. Nasr’s religious and scholarly efforts, it must be noted that his conception of religion’s role in public life is incomplete. The most crucial element for ensuring the implementation of profound religious teachings in society is the possibility of taking control of governance. A ruler’s mere claim to religiosity—without genuine knowledge of religious teachings—leads to the same disasters witnessed during the Pahlavi era. While the most fundamental Islamic rulings were suspended, Nasr considered his effort to rename Farah Street to Mulla Sadra Street as a reformative achievement!
Generally speaking, a key weakness of Traditionalist projects is their failure to correctly diagnose political issues and interpret related phenomena. Thus, although Nasr and other Traditionalists serve as valuable advocates for the contemplative dimensions of religion, they remain incapable of addressing political inequalities within the global system.
What emerges from Nasr’s views as a "defensive project" against Western modernity is the idea that by equipping oneself with Islamic spirituality and understanding the philosophical foundations of Western civilization, one can merely reduce the negative effects of modernity’s application.
His deep commitment to what he calls the Perennial Philosophy or “spiritual heritage” (more accurately, Sufism) leads to unfair critiques of revolutionary revivalist movements. He considers great movements like the Islamic Revolution—which directly challenged the core of Western civilization—as syncretic and, in fact, supportive of modernity. He believes such movements neglect Islam’s spiritual, aesthetic, intellectual, and artistic legacies.
Nasr does not primarily view modernity through the lens of Iran’s historical developments, but rather engages with the topic from the broader perspective of Islam–West relations. As a result, his body of work lacks precise analyses of Iranian issues within the context of Western modernity.